Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2011.r.09

Rainfed Areas and Animal Agriculture in Asia: The Wanting Agenda for Transforming Productivity Growth and Rural Poverty  

Devendra, C. (Consulting Tropical Animal Production Systems Specialist)
Publication Information
Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences / v.25, no.1, 2012 , pp. 122-142 More about this Journal
Abstract
The importance of rainfed areas and animal agriculture on productivity enhancement and food security for economic rural growth in Asia is discussed in the context of opportunities for increasing potential contribution from them. The extent of the rainfed area of about 223 million hectares and the biophysical attributes are described. They have been variously referred to inter alia as fragile, marginal, dry, waste, problem, threatened, range, less favoured, low potential lands, forests and woodlands, including lowlands and uplands. Of these, the terms less favoured areas (LFAs), and low or high potential are quite widely used. The LFAs are characterised by four key features: i) very variable biophysical elements, notably poor soil quality, rainfall, length of growing season and dry periods, ii) extreme poverty and very poor people who continuously face hunger and vulnerability, iii) presence of large populations of ruminant animals (buffaloes, cattle, goats and sheep), and iv) have had minimum development attention and an unfinished wanting agenda. The rainfed humid/sub-humid areas found mainly in South East Asia (99 million ha), and arid/semi-arid tropical systems found in South Asia (116 million ha) are priority agro-ecological zones (AEZs). In India for example, the ecosystem occupies 68% of the total cultivated area and supports 40% of the human and 65% of the livestock populations. The area also produces 4% of food requirements. The biophysical and typical household characteristics, agricultural diversification, patterns of mixed farming and cropping systems are also described. Concerning animals, their role and economic importance, relevance of ownership, nomadic movements, and more importantly their potential value as the entry point for the development of LFAs is discussed. Two examples of demonstrated success concern increasing buffalo production for milk and their expanded use in semi-arid AEZs in India, and the integration of cattle and goats with oil palm in Malaysia. Revitalised development of the LFAs is justified by the demand for agricultural land to meet human needs e.g. housing, recreation and industrialisation; use of arable land to expand crop production to ceiling levels; increasing and very high animal densities; increased urbanisation and pressure on the use of available land; growing environmental concerns of very intensive crop production e.g. acidification and salinisation with rice cultivation; and human health risks due to expanding peri-urban poultry and pig production. The strategies for promoting productivity growth will require concerted R and D on improved use of LFAs, application of systems perspectives for technology delivery, increased investments, a policy framework and improved farmer-researcher-extension linkages. These challenges and their resolution in rainfed areas can forcefully impact on increased productivity, improved livelihoods and human welfare, and environmental sustainability in the future.
Keywords
Rainfed; Less favoured areas; Animal Agriculture; Diversification; Food Security; Feed Resources; Technology Application; Systems Perspectives; Farming Systems Research; Dryland Agriculture; Sustainability; Integration; Policy; Strategies; Impacts; Investments in R and D;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
Times Cited By Web Of Science : 1  (Related Records In Web of Science)
Times Cited By SCOPUS : 1
연도 인용수 순위
1 Rivera, W. M. and V. R. Sulaiman. 2009. Extension: object of reform, engine for innovation. Outlook Agric. 38:267-274.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Shrestha, H. R. and D. R. Pradhan. 1995. Research priorities for animal agriculture by agro-ecological zones in Nepal. In: Global agenda for livestock research. Proc. of the Consultation for South Asia region (Ed. C. Devendra and P. Gardiner). Patancheru, India, International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya, p. 85.
3 Singh, H. P., K. D. Sharma, G. S. Reddy and K. L. Sharma. 2004. Dryland agriculture in India. In: Challenges and Strategies for Dryland Agriculture, Special Publ. No. 32, CSSA, Madison, USA. p. 16.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Shankar, R. and P. Maraty. 2009. Concerns of India's farmers. Outlook Agric. 38:96-100.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Shukla, R. K. and S. D. Brahmankar. 1999. Impact evaluation of operation flood in rural dairy sector, National Council of Applied Economic Research, New Delhi, India. p. 58.
6 TAC (Technical Advisory Committee). 1992. Review of CGIAR of Prioritd Strategies. Part 1, TAC Secretariat, FAO, Rome, Italy. p. 250.
7 TAC (Technical Advisory Committee). 1994. Review of CGIAR of Priorities and Strategies. Part 1, TAC Secretariat, FAO, Rome, Italy. p. 229.
8 Thornton, P. K., J. van der Steeg, A. Notenbart and M. Herrero. 2009. The impacts of climate change on livestock and livestock systems in developing countries: A review of what we know and what we need to know. Agric. Syst. 103:113-127.
9 UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 1996. Urban agriculture, food, jobs and sustainable cities. Publication series for Habitat 11, United Nations Development Programme, New York, USA.
10 World Bank. 2003. Reaching the poor. A renewal strategy for rural development. Washington, DC, USA. (Mimeograph).
11 World Bank. 2009. The state of food security in the world, Washington, DC, USA. p. 56.
12 MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Current State and trends (Ed. R. Hassan, R. Scholes and N. Ash). 1:133-134.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Misra, A. K., C. A. Rama Rao, K. V. Saubramanyam and Y. S. Ramakrishna. 2009. Improving dairy production in India's ranfed agroecosystem: constraints and strategies. Outlook Agric. 38:284-292.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Mudgal, V. D. and K. Pradhan. 1988. Animal feed resources and current patterns of utilisation in India. In: Proc. non-conventional feed resources and fibrous crop residues in India (Ed. C. Devendra). International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada. p. 139.
15 Nagayets, O. 2005. Small farms: current status and key trends. Proc. The Future of Small Farms. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, USA. p. 355.
16 OECD-FAO. 2010. Agricultural outlook 2010-2019.Highlights, Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development, Paris, France, and the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
17 Pardey, P. G. and N. W. Beintema. 2001. Slow magic. Agricultural R and D: a century after Mendel, International Food Policy Research Institute Food Policy Report, Washington DC, USA. p. 22.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Qiu, H., F. Zhang, W. Zhu, H. Wang and X. Cheng. 2008. Reorientation of China's agriculture over the next two decades. Outlook Agric. 37:247-254.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Raghavan, G. V., N. Krishna and M. R. Reddy. 1995. Priorities for feed resources use in the semi-arid Tropics`. In: Global agenda for livestock research. Proc. of the Consultation for South Asia region (Ed. C. Devendra and P. Gardiner). Patancheru, India, International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya, p. 37.
20 Lin, J. Y. 1998. Cited by M. W. Rosegrant and P. B. R. Hazell. 2000. Transforming the rural Asian economy: the unfinished revolution, Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines. 1:64.
21 Mahadevan, P. and C. Devendra. 1986. Present and projected ruminant production systems. South East Asia and the South Pacific, In: Forages in South East Asia and the Pacific. ACIAR Proc. No. 12:1-6.
22 Devendra, C. 2010b. Food production from animals in Asia: priority for expanding the developing frontiers. ASM Science J. 4:173-184.
23 Devendra, C. 2011. Integrated tree crops-ruminants systems in South East Asia: Advances in productivity enhancement and environmental sustainability. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 24:587-602.   과학기술학회마을   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Devendra, C. 2012. Climate change threats and effects : challenges for agriculture and food security. Academy of Science Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (In press).
25 Devendra, C. and C. Chantalakhana. 2002. Animals, poor people and food insecurity: opportunities for improved livelihoods through natural resource management. Outlook Agric. 31:161-176.   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Devendra, C. and R. A. Leng. 2011. Feed resources for animals in Asia: Issues, strategies for use, intensification and integration for increased productivity. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 24:303-321.   과학기술학회마을   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Devendra, C. and D. Thomas. 2001. Crop-animal interactions in mixed farming systems in Asia. Agric. Syst. 71:27-40.
28 Devendra, C., D. Thomas, M. A. Jabbar and H. Kudo. 1997. Improvement of livestock production in crop-animal systems in the rainfed agro-ecological zones of South East Asia. Nairobi, Kenya. p. 107.
29 Ellis, F. and H. A. Freeman. 2000. Rural livelihoods and poverty reduction strategies in four African countries. J. Dev. Stud. 40:1-30.
30 Edwards, P., H. Demaine, N. Innes-Taylor and D. Turongruan. 1996. Sustainable aquaculture for small-scale farmers: need for a balanced model. Outlook Agric. 25:9-26.
31 Fan, S. and P. Hazell. 2000. Should developing countries invest more in less- favored lands? An empirical analysis of rural India. Econ. Polit.Wkly 35:1455-1564.
32 Dastagiri, M. B. 2010. The effect of government expenditures on promoting livestock GDP and reducing rural poverty in India. Outlook Agric. 39:127-133.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Deolalikar, A. 1981. The inverse relationship between productivity and farm size. A test using data from India. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 63:263-275.
34 Devendra, C. 1989. Ruminant production systems in the developing countries: resource utilization. In: Feeding strategies for improved productivity of ruminant livestock in developing countries, IAEA, Vienna, Austria, p 5.
35 Devendra, C. 1999. Goats: Challenges of increased productivity and improved livelihoods. Outlook Agric. 28:215-226.
36 Devendra, C. 2004. Integrated tree crops - ruminants systems. The potential importance of the oil palm. Outlook Agric. 33:157-166.   DOI   ScienceOn
37 Devendra, C. 2005. Improvement of crop-animal systems in rainfed agriculture in South East Asia. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Livestock-Crop Systems to Meet the Challenges of Globalisation (Ed. P. Rawlinson, C. Wachirapakorn, P. Pakdee and M. Wanapat). Khon Kaen, Thailand, 1:220-231.
38 Devendra, C. 2007a. Perspectives on animal production systems in Asia. Livest. Sci. 106:1-18.   DOI   ScienceOn
39 Devendra, C. 2007c. Goats: biology, production and development in Asia. Academy of Sciences Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. p. 246.
40 Devendra, C. 2007b. Small farm systems to feed hungry Asia Outlook Agric. 36:7-20.   DOI   ScienceOn
41 Devendra, C. 2009.Intensification of integrated oil palm-ruminant systems: enhancing increased productivity and sustainability in South East Asia. Outlook Agric. 38:71-82.   DOI   ScienceOn
42 Devendra, C. 2010a. Small farms in Asia. Revitalising agricultural production, food security and rural prosperity. Academy of Sciences Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. p. 175.
43 ADB (Asian Development Bank). 1989. Rainfed agriculture in Asia and the Pacific. Asian development Bank, Manila, Philippines, p. 91.
44 ADB. 2009 .The economics of climate change in South East Asia: a regional review. Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines, p. 225.
45 Alexandratos, N. 1995. World Agriculture towards 2010. FAO, Rome, Italy, p. 488.
46 FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation). 1996. FAO AGROSTAT 1995, 49, FAO, Rome, Italy.
47 Ramachandra, K. S., V. K. Taneja, K. T. Sampath, S. Anandan and U. B. Angadi. 2007. Livestock feed resources in different agro ecological zones of India: availability, requirement and their management. National Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology, Bangalore, India. p. 100.   DOI   ScienceOn
48 Fan, S., P. Hazell and S. Thorat. 2000. Targetting public investments by agroecological zone to achieve growth and poverty alleviation goals in rural India. Food Policy 20:411-428.
49 Fan, S., L. Zhang and X. Zhang. 2000. Growth and poverty in rural China: The role of public investments. Environment and Production Technology Division Discussion Paper No.66, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC, USA.
50 FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation). 1997. FAO Prod.Yearbook,1996,50, FAO, Rome, Italy. p. 235.
51 FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation). 1998. Sustainable agricultural production. Implications of international agricultural research. FAO Res. Technol. Paper No. 4, FAO, Rome, Italy. p. 31.
52 Government of India. 1997. Report on land and livestock holdings. National Sample Survey Organisation, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, New Delhi, India. (Mimeograph)
53 Hanumanth Rao, C. H. 1994. Agricultural growth and rural poverty in India: emerging trends and perspectives. Indian Econ. Rev. 28:129-140.
54 IASSD 2008. International Assessment on Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya http://agassessment.watch.org/
55 Kohler-Rollefson, I. and K. Kishore. 2010. Shaping policies to support socially and ecologically sustainable livestock development in India's rain-fed areas. Rain-fed Livestock Network, Anand, Gujarat, India. p. 32.
56 Cornia, A. 1985. Farm size, land yields and the agricultural production function: an analysis for fifteen developing countries. World. Dev. 13:513-534.   DOI   ScienceOn
57 FAO 2011. The state of food security in the world. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. p. 43.
58 Alston, J., M. C. Marra, P. Pardey and T. J. Wyatt. 1998. Research returns redux: a meta- analysis of the returns to agricultural R and D. EPTD Discussion Paper No. 38, IFPRI, Washington, DC, USA.
59 Birthal, P. S. 2008. Linking smallholder livestock procedures to markets: Issues and approaches. Indian J. Agric. Econ. 63:19-37.
60 CGIAR/TAC (Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research/Technical Advisory Committee). 2000. 'CGIAR priorities for marginal lands', CGIAR, Washington, USA. (Mimeograph).